Guns in the News: Is the Second Next? | Gun Owners | USCCA

With the COVID-19 pandemic and cities being burned in the name of justice, no one denies this is a time of immense strain on our American social fabric. The term “crisis” is bandied about as if the nation were on the brink of a disaster from which it might never recover.


This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/blog/guns-in-the-news-is-the-second-next/

In New Jersey, where I unfortunately live, the 2nd could be the next victim. I have just recently been advised by USCCA that effective with my anniversary date of June 17, USCCA will no longer be able to insure me or other members because Gov. Murphy has, by executive order, banned USCCA and other like organizations from doing business in the gulag of New Jersey. Unbelievable. This also, I’m told, applies to banks and other businesses that do business with companies that ‘promote unsafe firearm’ practices like USCCA, arms manufacturers,etc. Are you kidding me-USSCCA promotes unsafe firearms practices? I am not making this up, this is real. If I didn’t have my children and grandchildren here, I would be gone, fast. For those that don’t know by now, no average citizen in the state of New Jersey is able to obtain a concealed carry license, no one! I could go on and on, but I will stop here.

2 Likes

Very sad news about New Jersey, because over next to the Big Pond here in Oregon, we have a Democrat governor who has been adamantly opposed to the 2nd Amendment and all things gun for her entire career. I am sure that these leftists exchange information frequently, citing what forms of restriction they have put on the books. If there is one lesson to be learned, it is that “one party” rule fosters and emboldens those seeking to quell our freedoms.

1 Like

Extremely concerned about the California and US Supreme Court ruling allowing the restriction of worship. There is a congressional bill in play Now called H.R. 6666 Which will effect open up “mandatory home Covid- 19 tracking”.This bill 6666 is an invasion of privacy. It must not pass. If it does, it could be “extended” to msndatorily confiscate our arms.
Please advise what level of Political involvement USCCA.COM has in place to fight these machinations - I want to be part of that effort to secure our rights to worship and bear arms. USCCA, Please reach out to me via text or email with your advise: direction. Thank you.

1 Like

So I’m in California in the Sacramento region of the central valley. To be more specific, I lived my whole life in the town of woodland about 25 miles NW of Sacramento.

I have a son who just turned 14 three days ago. I have been looking for a starter rifle for him for several months now for his birthday and have found it extremely difficult to find anything that’s affordable and more suitable for a first gun. I found a few fairly inexpensive models for sale by Big5. So I called the store in woodland and was informed they did have some of them in stock. I took my son to the store yesterday to look at what they had available and I was told they aren’t selling firearms right now because of all the rioting.

Let me back up just a bit. Yolo county and the city of woodland have been extreme in their fight against the spread of covid-19 and are requiring and strictly enforcing facemasks in public. I had 2 masks, one for me one for my son. I spilled my coke on mine so I took a handful of napkins and held them over my face. Although it is recommended by the county per their website that the masks be hands free, it is not required. However, as usual, the manager used his own interpretation of the ordinance and refused to let me in the store. I asked if he had masks available and was told they were available for sale, a box of 10 for $16. I went next door to the dollar tree and bought a scarf to put over my face and was allowed into Big5 by the boy at the counter who then directed me to the firearms counter and called someone to assist me. It was the manager who again took exception with my face covering but backed down. I asked him if I could see what long guns he had in stock. After looking at me weird for a minute he said they weren’t selling firearms at that time. I asked when that was instituted and he got even more annoyed with me and said whenever all the riots started. I asked him to be more specific but got nothing more from him.

I then asked him if I could ask him a question. He reluctantly agreed. I asked him how many ppl had come to the store without a mask…when he interrupted me and very adamantly asserted that no one gets in the store without a mask. I then asked him to let me finish because I was trying to make a point. Again I was interrupted and spoken to in a very irate disrespectful manner. I then told him I wanted to know how many people. he turned away in a day who didn’t have a mask or acceptable facecovering because if there’s even 10 people then why couldn’t he open a box of the masks and sell each one for 1.60, times 10 is the cost of the box. He said he couldn’t do that. I asked why and he said that’s not the way they do things there. I then got his name and am contacting corporate to look into this.

After I left I checked the big5 website and while I could find guns in-store at other big5 locations there were none for this store. It’s very possible he isn’t selling firearms during the rioting and I haven’t even begun to take issue with that yet. But I felt then and still feel now that I was arbitrarily denied the purchase of a firearm by this man making me wonder what gives him the right to arbitrarily pick and choose who he sells a gun to. There is a 10-day hold on any firearm purchase in california during which time an extensive background is done on the purchaser. The state of California screens the purchases of firearms. Who is he to play law enforcement? I cannot fathom for the life of me his rationale behind making an alleged decision to not sell firearms, especially when the Sacramento stores are still selling firearms and that’s where all the violent protests were going on. I read every single sign on his storefront and there was nothing indicating they were halting the sell of firearms. There’s nothing on the store’s own website (not the chain’s website) addressing the halt of firearms sales.

I then went to Yolo County’s website to see what exactly was required with regard to a face covering. Again, he used his own interpretion of the regulation to establish policies for the store, policies that obviously are pushing against constitutional rights and discriminations.

The heading on this thread is regarding the second amendment and will they be able to successfully usurp our right to bear arms. This is scary because this type of “misinterpreting” legislation has been going on for some time now in California and most people can’t won’t or don’t know how to go about doing anything about it. Do we have to worry? Yeah, I’d say so. Regardless of whether this particular store manager has made the decision to halt firearms sales or this was a farce directed at me personally is irrelevant in my opinion. Either way, by being a supplier of firearms for sale and then arbitrarily choosing when he will and won’t sell them seems sketch but I don’t know that it actually violates any rights or legislation. It’s just too close to crossing the line. California has already usurped so many of our rights and aren’t challenged. The individual counties and cities have no accountability and that’s where it starts. Hospitals and clinics here and throughout most of the country have instituted policies REQUIRING expectant mothers to sign a consent-to-drug-test form forcing them to give up numerous constitutional rights. If the mother asserts her constitutional rights and refuses to sign it, the medical facility views it as an indicator that the mother IS on drugs and alerts child protective services who then sets up camp in her life and they will test the mother through her pregnancy and the baby at birth and depending on their whim (child welfare laws are very broad and almost all are subjective) may remove the child from the mother’s care, holding the child hostage until the mother conforms. It’s disgusting and terrifying and if they can get that far into our constitutional rights I can’t hold my breath that the second amendment will stand forth. I actually get knots in the pit of my gut when I think about the nazi regime that’s dictating and tyrranizing our lives and the possibility that I may not always have the ability to defend and protect my home and family. Those are my thoughts. Thanks for reading.

2 Likes

scary stuff. It’s like that in california too

“Similar or more severe restrictions,” he continued, “apply to comparable secular gatherings, including lectures, concerts, movie showings, spectator sports and theatrical performances, where large groups of people gather in close proximity for extended periods of time.”

Not sure Chief Justice Roberts is mentally competent to sit on any court. Where in the Constitution does it state a right to go to the movies, or spectator sports?

It is interesting, they argued for the suppression of individual rights, the Right to Freedom of Religion… and the states run by leftist political forces attack anyone who says the draconian Covid-19 ‘rules’ should be lifted… but then they say it is perfectly fine to get together and protest, riot, loot…

If a state can declare a health emergency and deny Constitutionally guaranteed rights, they can and will declare a health emergency on firearms and gun violence… the CDC under Obama was studying gun violence as a national health issue…
And once they declare a health emergency, we the people have stood idle and allowed the government to subvert the Constitution, rule of law, rights, freedom and liberty.

So, yes… if we continue to allow this, if the Overton Window continues creeping left, we allow ‘Red Flag’ laws… we will see the ‘government’ attempting to confiscate our firearms as a matter of national health and the safety of the people.

I can say this, I am not worried that short term orders will become the new normal; however, it can certainly be used as a stepping stone to justify longer actions being taken if nothing is done to stop it. Legality aside we have seen states overreaching and trying to ban everything they consider dangerous. To many times I see people argue for the second amendment and not bring facts with them to the stage, only the fact that it’s in our constitution. While the argument is correct, it does very little at persuading views or showing how a law is ineffective.

For example we know from reading Concealed Carry that mass shooters tend to shoot at a slower rate than what is possible with even a 5rd magazine, so limiting magazine capacity only restricts law biding citizens and not the criminals. The problem is what I hear repeatedly is the second amendment protects our right to bear arms and not the information showing these states and individuals why the laws they are proposing don’t work and shouldn’t be considered. Where are the repeated nationwide commercials showing the facts, and making people think about what is really happening. I’m going to be the one running low on power and/or ammo in a gun fight to protect mine and your family not the criminals, if these laws keep going.

Waiting to bring out facts until a problem occurs does very little to persuade people. It’s hard to talk with someone who’s child was involved in a school shooting and prevent a new law, but if they had the facts prior to, they would be less likely to blame the gun and more likely to blame the person. We have seen this over and over. The military is a prime example of this, for those that remember how vietnam vets were treated when they returned home. The perception was changed when campaigns started to highlight the hero’s and the families who waited for them. Now no one would speak out in a crowd against them because they changed how they were perceived and what they have done for America.

If we want to stop further restrictions and actually guarantee our rights without conflict we need to push the information we have out there, and show that most gun owners are family men and women who want nothing more than to be able to protect themselves and others, when seconds count. We train, compete, defend others, promote safety among our own children, and we do so without infringing on others. We are the responsible gun owners of America.

Gun laws restrict us, they do nothing to stop criminals who have a tor browser from going on the dark web and having large magazines, guns, drugs, and just about anything else delivered right to their home discreetly.

So is the second amendment next, no. It’s under attack now and people agree with more laws because they are only seeing the tragedy and not the people that own guns. They see the stats on suicide by gun, they see the violence across the nation. They don’t see us, they don’t see all the trainers and all the victims who are being saved by concealed carry. So yes we have the second amendment but that only means something to people that exercise that right, if 60% of America owned guns then we could stand on the second amendment alone. We need to rebrand so to speak and get the right information in their face, not only on a website but screaming across the TV, ads, and other areas that can’t be ignored. Data will sync in, say anything enough times and people will start to believe it, even if it’s untrue as well have seen the past few years.

We need a new approach before the next tragedy, we need to make it so people who speak out falsely are in the minority not the majority. We need to bring people back together not farther apart, the most radical are being listened to, while the rest are being ignored. We are being thrown into a fight, that doesn’t end well for either side. This fight could be peaceful if done right, but the path has to be changed.

1 Like

It’s not next, it’s now…